Good Friday and The Easter Paradox

 Friends,  

This Saturday (5:00PM) and Sunday (9:00 and 10:30AM), it is guaranteed that you will hear the best sermon ever (by someone not named Jesus.) It feels immodest to put it out there like that, but it’s true. 

 

Ah, Good Friday. What an odd adjective for such a tragic day. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “The earliest known use of ‘guode Friday’ is found in The South English Legendary, a text from around 1290. There are various explanations why “good” is used for such an awful event, none of which is entirely convincing. It is certainly a matter of perspective. On that fateful day itself, it is hard to imagine anything good about it. But, from the hindsight of the resurrection, what that death accomplished ended up being salvation itself. Keep that in mind: Something tragic in itself can, in fact, be something salvific by God’s grace. I’m going to coin a term for it here: “The Easter Paradox.” 

 

“The Easter Paradox” may be the best way we have for looking at Judas and his betrayal. The motivation of Judas’ act is described in different ways among the gospels. One minute he looks like a cad from the start, dipping his hand into the treasury instead of keeping it as he should. Jesus even tells him that it would have been better if he had never been born – think about how awful that idea is. On the other hand, there is a kind of destiny to what Judas is doing, with his betrayal as one of those “it is necessary” kinds of events. One might even think that Judas was zealously trying to kick this Reign of God movement into high gear, after such a glorious entry into Jerusalem. And, by no means was he the only disciple who thought Jesus should become the king by some way other than death. They all thought that. In “The Easter Paradox,” what Judas deigned to do – out of zeal or perfidy – was what needed to happen. 

 

“The Easter Paradox” is evident in Jesus’ prayer in the garden also. Jesus prays repeatedly that, if it were possible, he be spared of what lay ahead. But, in the end, he relented his will to God’s will saying – as we are supposed to pray – “your will be done.” Karl Barth notes that in this prayer, what Jesus’ enemies want is the same as what God wants. In “The Easter Paradox,” God can use even the evil intentions of Jesus’ enemies to bring about something good. 

 

Additionally, “The Easter Paradox” is evident in the words of the High Priest Caiaphas, who accidentally prophesied when he said, “It is better for one man to die than for the whole nation to suffer.” What Caiaphas was reckoning is the kind of scapegoating mechanism that leaders have followed for centuries. The best way to keep the peace is to find a common scapegoat that we can all despise and get rid of together. It was why Native American, then African Americans, then Japanese Americans, then Muslim Americans were so easily dehumanized and mistreated legally. It’s still being done when preachers rail on and on about the destructive power of transgender children, or politicians stir up their base by blaming all our societal ills on immigrants. When Caiaphas invoked the age-old scapegoating song, that too became something that God was able to make into an Easter miracle. 

 

When all these folks were participating in the death of Jesus, they were culpable of doing evil. “The Easter Paradox” does not deny that. What “The Easter Paradox” does, however, is to ensure that denying, betraying, scapegoating, torturing, and so on do not have the last word. In a world like ours, it’s the only hope we have. 

 

That’s why you need to be in worship celebrating “The Easter Paradox” this weekend.

 

Mark of St. Mark